Alex Riesen wrote: > 2009/3/20 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: >> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Alex Riesen wrote: >> >>> 2009/3/20 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: >>>> Now, we _do_ have msysGit, you _do_ have shown the capability to fix >>>> issues when they arise, so I do _not_ see any obstacle why you should >>>> not go msysGit, rather than staying with the pain of trying to stay >>>> POSIX-compatible, but not quite all the time. >>> I understand. It is not pure POSIX compatibility I seek. I just can't >>> use MinGW port, because I absolutely must use the cygwin environment >>> (for "hysterical" reasons) and they don't play well together (tried, >>> yes. Conflicting libraries, but you already know that). >> Maybe we can work on those conflicting libraries? After all, we do have a >> "rebase.exe" tool now (for all those as puzzled by the naming as I was: >> the rebase.exe tool can shift the memory range used by a .dll so that it >> does not overlap with that one of another .dll). > > As long as they can be made to coexist I'm fine. Wasn't the problem > that MinGW/MSYS used cygwin1.dll if it were in PATH? Or was it > something else with their supporting libraries? > > My other problem is that the cygwin programs, and the worst of all - a > proprietary compiler based on cygwin, must be in PATH. AFAIR, the > presence of cygwin in PATH broken shell scripting. How about a wrapper that fixes the PATH before exec'ing git? i.e. removes cygwin and the compiler. Rogan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
